| jetforcejiminy said: you're right about it being a cycle, it's just not really a virtuous one. gaming history is littered with the overextension of certain game types... think of the (2d) platformer fest of the late nes, early snes era. everything was a platformer. then that gave way to (j)rpgs being dominant for a good bit of the nineties, then the platformer made a comeback except in 3d and that lasted into last decade (jak and daxter, ratchet and clank, "taz the tasmanian tiger" and all the other bizarre mascots, which were all in some way ripoffs of banjo kazooie)... and then open-world games and shooters and open-world shooters caught on with gta 3 and halo the same year (2001), and it's been smooth sailing ever since, right? i think openworld games have potential, it's just none of it is in evidence right now. also, i've always wanted to say this: watch dogs, the true crime of 2014. (just to prove how stuck we are in the same infinite loop of shit) |
It may not be entirely beneficial but it's also completely unavoidable. Gaming is an incredibly competitive business, and often comes with a lot of risk. I can't blame developers/publishers for either following market trends or sticking with the same "safe" IP for years on end.
I think open world games have already proved themselves several times over. There are plenty of mediocre ones (like any genre), but recent games like FarCry 4, Dragon Age; Inquisition and GTA5 have all made excellent use the genre. Future titles like Zelda U and The Witcher 3 look like they'll continue that trend. I think we're edging towards having too many, but i'm happy enough with how things are right now.
It's also nice to see series like Uncharted open themselves up more, while still maintain high degrees of visual fidelity (all dat sweet sweet foliage). Horaah for new hardware :p
